And thus brings the debate to its head, Mary.
Seriously and kindly, I suggested that only Jun can solve it, because our very real debate IS... one of pertinence, IS...one of relevance. Your opening comment regarding "signal to noise" in itself suggests a lack of relevance; noise as opposed to good signal.
Dan, I'd have a much easier time accepting the relevance of IS, if you ever approached any aikido topic as aikido, and didn't always try to turn it into a discussion about IS. I understand the limitations of the signal vs. noise analogy, in that it can be seen as too rigidly dualistic -- but to you, it's all IS and that's all we should be talking about. There are no boundaries, nothing's off limits to be turned into an IS discussion/proselytization, and to be honest, it seems to me that you don't have any genuine interest in aikido per se -- only as a vehicle to promote your views on IS. If I want to read IS discussions, I'll go find an IS website. Is IS relevant to aikido? Maybe, but how can I tell when you're constantly clubbing me over the head with it? You are forcibly dragging the horses to water, and constantly berating and mocking them as willfully ignorant when they don't want to go at your pace, or not at all right now, thank you very much. Well, we've all got a few truths that we think we've got a handle on, and we're not all wrong in the head just because we don't want to march in the IS parade. As for signal vs. noise? To paraphrase Forrest Gump, "Noisy is as noisy does."